A TV First in Presidential Race : Prodded, the top five networks promise candidates free air time

All of the commercial television networks have now offered free time to the major presidential candidates next fall, establishing a precedent that deserves to stand in future elections. While the announcements of the offers contained the usual high-minded phrases about serving the public interest, the fact is the networks decided only grudgingly to provide the unpaid time.

The formats and amount of time they have proposed vary considerably. In the end, though, the candidates are at least assured of having more opportunities to speak directly to the American people. It’s even possible--anything can be hoped for--that they will use that time to move beyond sloganeering and hollow sound bites to talk seriously and in some detail about the great issues before the nation.

Credit a former Washington Post reporter named Paul Taylor with organizing the campaign that ultimately persuaded--or shamed--ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC into agreeing to the free time plan. And credit Rupert Murdoch for making the first offer of free time on his Fox TV network, an hour for the major-party candidates on election eve next November. Fox TV has often been criticized for the shallowness and mediocrity of its programming, but its initiative on the free-time question clearly helped nudge the other networks toward the decisions they announced this week.

This unpaid access to the airwaves will in fact cost most of the networks almost nothing. CBS says it will invite the candidates to appear on its regular news programs to talk about matters that its polls indicate are most on the voters’ minds. CNN plans to provide each candidate five minutes a week for four weeks on its “Inside Politics” show. NBC also will use polls to find what voters want to hear about and will give the candidates some time on its “Dateline NBC” news magazine. ABC is offering an evening hour in the campaign’s final week; it alone among the three biggest networks seems ready to provide that amount of prime time.

American democracy knows no more important event than the presidential election, and it is patently harmful to the health of that democracy when a candidate’s ability to speak to voters is determined to any degree by how much money he or she can spend for television time. At long last a start, imperfect but welcome, has been made in lowering the money barrier and opening up the communications process.